GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 16 Oct 2018, 09:34

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Archaeologists seeking the location of a legendary siege and

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 20 Nov 2006
Posts: 190
Archaeologists seeking the location of a legendary siege and  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Apr 2007, 11:33
1
00:00

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

59% (01:44) correct 41% (02:12) wrong based on 96 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Archaeologists seeking the location of a legendary siege and destruction of a city are excavating in several possible places, including a middle and a lower layer of a large mound. The bottom of the middle layer contains some pieces of pottery of type 3, known to be from a later period than the time of the destruction of the city, but the lower layer does not.

Which of the following hypotheses is best supported by the evidence above?

(A) The lower layer contains the remains of the city where the siege took place.
(B) The legend confuses stories from two different historical periods.
(C) The middle layer does not represent the period of the siege.
(D) The siege lasted for a long time before the city was destroyed.
(E) The pottery of type 3 was imported to the city by traders.

http://gmatclub.com/forum/archaeologist ... 38845.html
Director
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 573
Location: Kuwait
Re: Archaeologists seeking the location of a legendary siege and  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Apr 2007, 09:30
1
1
(A) The lower layer contains the remains of the city where the siege took place.
The argument does NOT provide any information about the lower layer. This statement can not be supported by the evidence.

(B) The legend confuses stories from two different historical periods.
Here is a scope-shift. The fact that the middle layer containts information about a specific age is a FACT and an evidence. It's not affected by what the Archaeologists are looking for.

(C) The middle layer does not represent the period of the siege. Exactly, if the middle layer contains pottery from another period, after the time of the city distruction, then it difnitely does NOT represent the period of the siege. By Logic, the siege comes first, then comes the distruction of the city.

(D) The siege lasted for a long time before the city was destroyed.
While this could be a possibility explaining the evidence in the argument, yet it can not be supported by the argument.

(E) The pottery of type 3 was imported to the city by traders.
Irrelevant and out of scope. Imported by traders ? where are we getting this from ?

Senior Manager
Joined: 04 May 2013
Posts: 300
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Human Resources
Schools: XLRI GM"18
GPA: 4
WE: Human Resources (Human Resources)

### Show Tags

30 Dec 2013, 10:48
1
dear slatewalamurtuza,

you are requested to post questions one at a time, so that it can be deliberated upon, without confusion of simultaneous address of two questions at a time...................................
Senior Manager
Joined: 04 May 2013
Posts: 300
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Human Resources
Schools: XLRI GM"18
GPA: 4
WE: Human Resources (Human Resources)
Re: Archaeologists seeking the location of a legendary siege and  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Jan 2014, 08:35
Archaeologists seeking the location of a legendary siege and destruction of a city are excavating in several possible places, including a middle and a lower layer of a large mound. The bottom of the middle layer contains some pieces of pottery of type 3, known to be from a later period than the time of the destruction of the city, but the lower layer does not.

ITS AN INFERENCE QUESTION....if the middle layer represented period of the seize........the bottom most layer would,nt have had pottery of a later period .....as this part(bottom most) represents the earliest occurrence of its evolution.....HENCE THE MIDDLE LAYER CANNOT REPRESENT PERIOD OF SEIZE......

(A) The lower layer contains the remains of the city where the siege took place.......MAY OR MAY NOT BE TRUE FROM THE STIMULUS.......
(B) The legend confuses stories from two different historical periods. CAN'T INFER THAT ....
(C) The middle layer does not represent the period of the siege. CORRECT..... WE CAN DEFINITELY SAY THAT FROM THE STIMULUS STATEMENTS....
(D) The siege lasted for a long time before the city was destroyed. CAN'T INFER THAT.....ITS HISTORY...INCORRECT....
(E) The pottery of type 3 was imported to the city by traders...NOWHERE MENTIONED.... INCORRECT...
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 3185
Re: Archaeologists seeking the location of a legendary siege and  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Sep 2018, 11:28
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________
Re: Archaeologists seeking the location of a legendary siege and &nbs [#permalink] 18 Sep 2018, 11:28
Display posts from previous: Sort by